LETTERS; Eating Locally, Thinking Globally

Published: August 28, 2010

To the Editor:

Re ''Math Lessons for Locavores'' (Op-Ed, Aug. 20):

Stephen Budiansky writes that locavores are wrong to worry so much about how far our food travels when the ''real energy hog'' is you and me: ''Home preparation and storage account for 32 percent of all energy use in our food system, the largest component by far.'' This may be true, but the lion's share of the food system's energy use comes from six other elements of the food chain, precisely the sectors locavores are trying to avoid.

A recent Department of Agriculture study reported that 28 percent of food energy use comes from households while much of the rest -- 57.6 percent -- comes from the processing, packaging, transportation, wholesale and retail, and food service energy use that locavores are seeking to avoid.

A real locavore cares about all of these steps.

A locavore wouldn't go for a Twinkie, even if the Hostess factory were two miles down the road.

I'll grant Mr. Budiansky that whether we stir-fry local organic kale or cook up a sauce of long-distance chemically grown tomatoes makes little difference solely in home-energy use. But I disagree that the entire locavore approach -- avoiding fast food and highly packaged, processed, chemically grown and long-distance food -- makes no difference to the environment, our health or the planet.

With this holistic approach to the plate, locavores are potentially creating a huge energy savings indeed.

Anna Lapp?p>
Brooklyn, Aug. 22, 2010

The writer is the author of ''Diet for a Hot Planet: The Climate Crisis at the End of Your Fork and What You Can Do About It.''

To the Editor:

I agree with Stephen Budiansky that the tenets of eating locally have been oversimplified and that all parts of our food system -- from cultivation to delivery to preparation -- need to be considered to assess the true costs of our meals. I also agree with his argument that food ought to be grown where it grows best, rather than growing locally those foods that, out of their comfort zone, require extensive energy and chemicals.

But the locavore movement nonetheless offers valuable lessons. It recognizes how accustomed we've become to eating foods well outside of their native ranges and seasons, and that to eat truly locally means learning to live without those foods that won't naturally grow in your own backyard, or in your local farmer's fields.

By reacquainting ourselves with regional eating and learning to savor what grows best locally (saving avocados and artichokes for special occasions and skipping hothouse tomatoes altogether), we can both grow foods most efficiently and reduce food miles.

Lisa Romano
Lexington, Ky., Aug. 20, 2010

To the Editor:

Locavores eat locally for a variety of reasons, including taste, transportation, safety and community.

To start, local food is fresher and often more nutritious. A tomato picked three weeks ago in California, shipped in a refrigerated car and stacked in the produce section of the grocery store in New York is simply not as tasty as an heirloom tomato picked locally within a few days.

That said, most Americans should not expect to have tomatoes in January. Eating seasonally is part of appreciating the diversity of local food.

But don't mistake local eating for self-abnegation; it's often just common sense. For example, it makes sense for Kentuckians like me to get our oranges from Florida. It does not make sense for us to get our apples from Washington State if we can get them from right across the river in Indiana.

Knowing where your food comes from also has a safety side. If the spinach you got last week made you sick, it's a lot easier to track down the source if you shop at the farmer's market than if you shop at Safeway.

Finally, buying food locally invests people -- emotionally and financially -- in their own agricultural communities, rebuilding connections between farmers and consumers that were broken by the industrialization of agriculture.

Let's not enumerate the potential pitfalls of being a locavore without also explaining the virtues.

Eric Burnette
Louisville, Ky., Aug. 20, 2010

To the Editor:

In Stephen Budiansky's insightful essay, he did not stress the most important reason that we should not rely only on local produce: fruits and vegetables in the winter.

Most of us older than about 45 can remember when fruit in winter meant canned pears dripping in oversweet juice. In the absence of other alternatives, it served a purpose, but it was expensive and not the best item nutritionally.

Nowadays you can go to a supermarket almost anywhere in America -- in the coldest months of January and February -- and get citrus fruits, fresh grapes, strawberries, tomatoes, melons and so on. Once seasonal delicacies, they are available year-round.

Steven Grossman
Silver Spring, Md., Aug. 20, 2010

To the Editor:

I grow a modest amount of vegetables and fruit. I eat produce that comes from a farm down the road, grown by farmers I know. And I prefer to buy food from local sources whenever I can.

It's not because I adhere to a locavore dogma, or because I'm misinformed about food miles or because I remain ignorant about the benefits of our efficient, industrialized food system in terms of energy calories (and the epidemic of obesity it has spawned).

It's because I'm interested in restoring community through the act of eating, rather than swallowing the cold logic of global economics.